Open AccessEvaluation of radiation treatment volumes for unknown primaries of the head and neck in the era of FDG PET
Author(s) -
A. Plątek,
M. Mix,
Varun Kumar Chowdhry,
Mark Farrugia,
Michael A. LaCombe,
Jeffrey A. Bogart,
Luke Degraaf,
Austin J. Iovoli,
Hassan Arshad,
Kimberly Wooten,
Vishal Gupta,
Wesley L. Hicks,
Mary E. Platek,
Seung S. Hahn,
Anurag Singh
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0231042
Subject(s) - head and neck , nuclear medicine , medicine , positron emission tomography , medical physics , head and neck cancer , radiation therapy , radiology , surgery
Objectives Positron-emission tomography (PET) has improved identification of the primary tumor as well as occult nodal burden in cancer of the head and neck. Nevertheless, there are still patients where the primary tumor cannot be located. In these situations, the standard of care is comprehensive head and neck radiation therapy however it is unclear whether this is necessary. This study examines the effects of radiation treatment volume on outcomes among using data from two cancer centers in unknown primary carcinoma of the head and neck. Methods Patients received unilateral (n = 34), or bilateral radiation (n = 28). Patient factors such as age, gender, smoking history, and patterns of failure were compared using Mann Whitney U and Chi Square. Overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) trends were estimated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Effect of treatment volume on survival was examined using multivariate cox proportional hazard regression model. Results No significant differences were observed in the frequency of local (p = 0.32), regional (p = 0.50), or distant (p = 0.76) failures between unilateral and bilateral radiation therapy. By Kaplan-Meier estimates, OS (3-year OS bilateral = 71.67%, unilateral = 77.90%, p = 0.50) and DFS (3-year DFS bilateral = 77.92%, unilateral = 69.43%, p = 0.63) were similar between the two treatment approaches. Lastly, multivariate analysis did not demonstrate any significant differences in outcome by treatment volumes (OS: HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.31, 1.81, p = 0.51; DFS: HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.24, 1.93, p = 0.47). Conclusions Unilateral radiation therapy compared with bilateral produced similar survival.